VRI v VRH: Appeal Against Contempt Order for Breaching Child Access Order

In VRI v VRH, the High Court (Family Division) heard an appeal by the Mother, VRI, against a District Judge's decision to commit her for contempt of court for breaching an Access Order related to her two daughters. The Father, VRH, had initiated committal proceedings. The High Court upheld the District Judge's findings of contempt on several counts, including breaches related to home-based learning days, a school holiday, and restrictions on the children's mobile phone usage. The court dismissed the Mother's appeal, except to vary the suspension of the contempt order to one year.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

General Division of the High Court (Family Division)

1.2 Outcome

Appeal dismissed except for variation of the suspension of the contempt order.

1.3 Case Type

Family

1.4 Judgment Type

Judgment

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Appeal against a contempt order for breaching a child access order. The court upheld the contempt order, emphasizing the importance of court-ordered access.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
VRIAppellant, DefendantIndividualAppeal Dismissed in PartPartial
VRHRespondent, PlaintiffIndividualSuccessful in Defending AppealWon

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Choo Han TeckJudge of the High CourtYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Mansurhusain Akbar HusseinJacob Mansur & Pillai
Grace ChackoGrace Chacko Law Practice

4. Facts

  1. The Mother and Father divorced in 2015 and have two daughters.
  2. An Access Order was made on 15 September 2021, outlining the Father's access to the children.
  3. The Father alleged that the Mother breached the Access Order on multiple occasions.
  4. The District Judge found the Mother guilty of contempt on seven counts.
  5. The Mother appealed the District Judge's committal order.
  6. The Mother restricted the children's use of mobile phones provided by the Father.
  7. The Mother did not ensure the children went to the Father's residence during stipulated access times.

5. Formal Citations

  1. VRI v VRH, , [2023] SGHCF 8
  2. Registrar’s Appeal from the Family Justice Courts, 23 of 2022, Registrar’s Appeal from the Family Justice Courts No 23 of 2022
  3. Divorce, 4126 of 2013, Divorce No 4126 of 2013

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Final judgment of divorce obtained.
Access Order FC/ORC 4813/2021 made.
Mother breached Access Order (elder daughter on home-based learning).
Mother breached Access Order (both daughters on home-based learning).
Mother breached Access Order (both daughters on home-based learning).
Mother began restricting children's mobile phone use.
Mother breached Access Order (younger daughter claimed to be unwell).
Mother breached Access Order (children did not go to Father's residence).
Mother breached Access Order (children did not visit Father).
Father took out a summons for leave to commence committal proceedings.
Judgment reserved.
Judgment delivered.

7. Legal Issues

  1. Breach of Access Order
    • Outcome: The court found that the Mother had breached the Access Order on multiple occasions.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Failure to comply with access schedule
      • Restriction of communication between father and children
  2. Contempt of Court
    • Outcome: The court upheld the finding of contempt, stating that the Mother's actions were intentional and with knowledge of the court order.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Intentionality of breach
      • Knowledge of court order
      • Reasonable non-compliance

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Setting aside of committal order

9. Cause of Actions

  • Contempt of Court

10. Practice Areas

  • Family Litigation
  • Divorce
  • Child Access

11. Industries

  • No industries specified

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
VFV v VFUCourt of AppealYes[2021] 5 SLR 1428SingaporeCited for the principle that a breach of a court order must be shown for contempt of court.
Monex Group (Singapore) Pte Ltd v E-Clearing (Singapore) Pte LtdCourt of AppealYes[2012] 4 SLR 1169SingaporeCited for the principle that the necessary intention for contempt of court must be established.
PT Sandipala Arthaputra v STMicroelectronics Asia Pacific Pte Ltd and othersCourt of AppealYes[2018] 4 SLR 828SingaporeCited for the principle that the motive for the breach is not the focus of the mens rea inquiry.
Mok Kah Hong v Zheng Zhuan YaoCourt of AppealYes[2016] 3 SLR 1SingaporeCited for the principle that an offender cannot be held liable for contempt if the court order is unclear.
Britestone Pte Ltd v Smith & Associates Far East, LtdCourt of AppealYes[2007] 4 SLR(R) 855SingaporeCited for the principle of evidential burden.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Administration of Justice (Protection) Act 2016Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Access Order
  • Contempt of Court
  • Committal Proceedings
  • Home-Based Learning
  • Intentional Breach
  • Reasonable Non-Compliance

15.2 Keywords

  • contempt of court
  • access order
  • family law
  • child access
  • singapore

17. Areas of Law

Area NameRelevance Score
Civil Contempt95
Access to Children95
Divorce90
Family Law90
Child Custody85
Evidence Law60
Civil Procedure50
Costs30

16. Subjects

  • Family Law
  • Contempt of Court
  • Child Access